Anyone aware of a supplier for headers to fit a 351c 4bbl in an early bronco?????

 

I'm not aware of any. I would consider a 351W instead of the Cleveland 4bbl, since that is a higher revving motor than the Windsor and better suited to a Mustang or other street project. Windsor is a good truck motor with torque range at a lower rpm.

 

I posted the same question at the cleveland engine forum and they came through for me- I would lean to the windsor too, but it will be in a mud racer 67 bronco with 4.56 gears, so the loss of low end torque wont be a big issue- besides, I will probably try a set of those port plates to gain a bit more low rpm port velocity.

 

Sounds good. So what was the answer to the header question, just out of curiosity?

 

I have the cleveland in my bronco. It has all the low end power you could want. Its all how you build the engine. I use 2v heads, the 4v heads would be a bit too big for the low end power but I have heard of guys using them with great results. For headers I use Sanderson FC3 block huggers. They are about the only off the shelf header you will be able to find. I have a few pics in my gallery if you wanna see them.

 

The Sanderson FC3 is what I was told - they are a street rod, block hugger type header, nice looking units though.

 

We just can't shake the Windsor faithful, can we?

 

Your right, but slowly more people are coming around and realizing that the cleveland is not just a high revving motor. I wonder what some of the windsor faithful would say if they happened upon some of the old Hot Rod magazines from 1970-ish. The windsor was never even thought of as a performance engine, many people dogged them and more often then not the magazines would refer to the cleveland as "Fords good 351". Hell even when the 400 first came out it was praised over the windsor, 400 cubic inches with cleveland heads, what potential. Just too bad Ford pulled the plug on the cleveland so early, then ruined the 400 by introducing the 351M. Oh well, atleast all the pantera's and aussies have kept the cleveland alive and doing well.
Not that the windsor is a bad engine, its a great engine, especially now with all the aftermarket support, but the cleveland is every bit as good and can be built for any purpose just like the windsor.

 

I agree. I like on the "other" Bronco board when the 400 is mentioned, it is poo-pooed as a "truck motor". Yet the 351W is supposed to be better in the Bronco than a Cleveland because it's a "truck motor". Hmmmmmm. When I was in high school waayyyy back in the early 80s, the 351W didn't even get honorable mention - if you were building a 351, it was a Cleveland. I see guys on the other board spending over a thousand dollars to stroke a 351W to 400 cubes, when they could take a "boat anchor" 400 and not only have the 400+ cubes, but start with more torque, in a vehicle where torque is what you're after. Sure, the W is a little lighter, but I could go off on another tangent about that. Then they build these strokers wanting more torque, and throw in a giant cam and a 750 carb on it, effectively raising the torque range to an area that most 4X4s can't use. Somehow they lose sight of the fact that they are building an engine for a four wheel drive, not a quarter mile or track car. The long and short; the 351W is a great engine. The 351C is a great engine. Both can be built to do whatever it is you want them to do, you just have to do your homework. I'd like to see someone make a real attempt at building a serious 400 and put in an EB, just to see how it works out. But the sad thing is that would be less acceptable to the early Bronco crowd than someone stuffing a 350 Chevy in it. Makes me want to puke.

 

I dont agree with the statement about a 350 chevy being more acceptable than a 400 ford in an early bronco. It just about puts me in a rage when I see a chevy in a bronco, It doesnt make sense to me- someone will spend thousands and thousands of dollars on suspension, gearing, lockers, bodywork, interior, etc. and then claim that a chevy engine is cheaper to build!!!! BULL-it doesnt cost that much more!!! Anyway, I was considering building a 400 for my current 73 bronco project because I thought the windsor I already had in it might go into something else. Don't know which way it's gonna go, but the torque of that 4 inch stroke 400 is tempting me anyway.

 

You think like I do - I've got a 400 too that I keep mulling around the idea of building. I've also got a couple of Clevelands, and one of them was my first choice. Not sure about the mileage of the 400; I know you don't really build them for economy, but with the direction gas prices are going, that has to get some consideration. It kind of takes some of the fun out of it when you have to feed something that gets 4 mpg. It's just that this topic has come up on another board 1956f100 and I frequent, and it always gets dogged clear off of the map. But every so often some jughead comes up with the "I got a 350..." thread, and about half of the guys think that's OK, using the "well it's not all Ford now anyway", or "most of us use the GM disc swap", etc. Go figure. I guess I come from a generation of car builders that took pride in whatever car brand they followed. Maybe I should build that 400. I could go on and on, but one reason right now I don't is that it's an MCC-cast block, and I'm worried about that lifter valley cracking problem they can have. But it is the small bellhousing block, so it would bolt right up to my C4. Then there is a Ranchero in a yard close to my house with a C4 behind a 351M - if I could get off of my butt and get these guys to lift it up so I could pull and buy that bellhousing, I could use any 400 block in front of my C4. OK, enough of this novel. I'm way off topic anyway.

 

Whats an MCC block???? I read somewhere that there are 400's that exist with smallblock patterns but I've never seen one or even had anyone else tell me they have seen one either. Have seen the big block C4 tranny though. If I build the 400 it will be a strictly trailrider rig so mileage wont be an issue- my last trailrider was an 83 bronco with a bone stock but extremely tired 400, probably ony made about 30 horsepower, didnt matter because all of that stroke made the torque that I really needed.

 

An MCC block is a block cast at the Michigan Casting Center. Before around mid-year of 77, blocks cast there had issues with cracking in the lifter valley area. No one really knows why, whether it was core shift when they were cast or what. Mine appears to be just fine, but I'm afraid of it deciding to crack after sinking hundreds of dollars into it. Mine is one of those oddball blocks. I'll probably just stick with the Cleveland idea anyway.

 

How do you identify the MCC block????

 

Look on the top rear where the oil sender is. Look on the 351C/351M/400 forum here for Bubbaf250. His posts will have a link to his website, and it gives a good description on there.